India’s censors now won’t allow the word ‘cow’ into a Harvard economist’s documentary

The documentary is named after a book of essays written by Sen which dwells on India’s long history of intellectual pluralism and public debate

Last updated:
PTI
PTI
PTI

New Delhi: He may have won a Nobel prize, but world-renowned Harvard economist Amartya Sen is not allowed to say the word “cow” in a new documentary, India’s movie censor board has ruled.

The documentary, called The Argumentative Indian, is named after a book of essays written by Sen which dwells (rather ironically) on India’s long history of intellectual pluralism and public debate. The movie will not get a licence for public screenings in India unless the cuts are implemented.

Censors have not said why the word “cow” is objectionable. The documentary at one point talks about the Hindu nationalist, self-styled cow protectors who attack people, mainly Muslims, for carrying or eating beef. Hindus consider the cow to be sacred.

The move comes against the backdrop of a rising nationalistic fervour in India following the victory of the Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014. The party has pushed policies in line with its conservative view of Hinduism, the majority religion of this diverse nation.

Director Suman Ghosh told India’s Telegraph that the censors’ cuts “underlines the relevance of the documentary in which Sen highlights the growing intolerance in India”.

He added that, “there is no way I would agree to beep or mute or change anything that one of the greatest minds of our times has said in the documentary.”

It wasn’t just cows that caught the censors’ attention. Ghosh was also asked by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to remove words such as “Gujarat”, the name of an Indian state, “Hindu India”, and “Hindutva view of India”, referring to the nationalist Hindu ideology espoused by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the ruling political party. The film now faces a lengthy appeal process through which he will attempt to fight the censor board’s decision.

In India, where films draw audiences of millions, nationalist ideology has slowly seeped into the experience of going to the movies. In 2016, the Supreme Court ordered that the national anthem must play before every screening, and audiences must stand during it.

Touchy, touchy

The CBFC has increasingly come under fire for overzealous censorship and moral policing under the leadership of Pahlaj Nihalani, a vocal supporterof the BJP, who appears to take offence to any implied criticism of India or its dominant religion.

Recently, the board asked directors to remove all references to the state of Punjab in a crime thriller called Udta Punjab, meaning Flying Punjab. Instead, the board demanded, the movie should be set in a fictional land. Censors made no comment at the time as to why references to Punjab were objectionable.

In the recent James Bond movie, Specter, a kissing scene was cut short. Another controversy involves a new Bollywood romantic comedy Jab Harry met Sejal, playing on the title of Hollywood’s When Harry met Sally, in which censors objected to the word “intercourse”.

The threat of violence from right-wing mobs has also resulted in censorship in recent months. In the Bollywood blockbuster Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, the role ofPakistani actor Fawad Khan was minimised after a right-wing group threatened to burn cinemas down.

Slamming the argument

The Argumentative Indian, which centres around Sen, shows clips of his conversations with former World Bank chief economist Kaushik Basu.

The word “cow”, which the board wants removed from the film, is heard in an answer to Basu’s question to Sen about the context of his book, according to the Telegraph. As part of his answer, Sen says, “There was a kind of grandness of vision there, and an integrated picture which hangs together in trying to embrace each other, not through chastising people for having mistreated a cow or some other thing, but dealing with people in terms of argument.”

Speaking to The Telegraph, Harvard historian Sugata Bose, who also features in the documentary, lambasted attempts to block the film. “It is a preposterous and unacceptable assault on the freedom of expression. The film ought to be given a certificate immediately. It is an academic film primarily where every word has been carefully weighed,” he said.

Get Updates on Topics You Choose

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Up Next